See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/389011028

Online Travel Reviews and Tourist Destination Choices: An

Extension of the Information Adoption Model

Article in Tourism Review International · March 2025

DOI: 10.3727/194344225X17315216888907

CITATION READS

1 90

4 authors:

Md. Tariqul Islam Halimin Herjanto

Taylor's University Marymount University
45 PUBLICATIONS 210 CITATIONS 71 PUBLICATIONS 820 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Jeetesh Kumar Muslim Amin

Taylor's University University of Technology Malaysia
126 PUBLICATIONS 701 CITATIONS 101 PUBLICATIONS 6,475 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Muslim Amin on 14 May 2025.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tourism Review International, Vol. 29, pp. 17–32 1544-2721/25 $60.00 + .00
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. DOI: [Link]
Copyright © 2025 Cognizant, LLC. E-ISSN 1943-4421
[Link]

Online Travel Reviews and Tourist Destination Choices:

An Extension of the Information Adoption Model

Md. Tariqul Islam,* Halimin Herjanto,† Jeetesh Kumar,‡ and Muslim Amin§¶

*School of Hospitality, Tourism and Events, Taylor’s University, Selangor, Malaysia

†College of Business, Innovation, Leadership and Technology, Marymount University, Arlington, VA, USA
‡Faculty of Social Sciences and Leisure Management, Centre for Research and Innovation in Tourism,
Sustainable Tourism Impact Lab, Taylor’s University, Selangor, Malaysia
§Azman Hashim International Business School, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM),
Kuala Lumpur Kampus, Malaysia
¶Faculty of Economics and Business, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia

Online reviews (OR) are essential in influencing tourists’ decision-making processes. Therefore, this
study investigates how online travel reviews impact tourists’ destination choices. Using a quantita-
tive research approach, 308 usable responses were collected through a purposive sampling technique
from individuals in Bangladesh and analyzed through PLS-SEM. The findings revealed that besides
perceived review usefulness, factors such as perceived review quality, perceived review diagnostic-
ity, and perceived review credibility significantly influence tourists’ online review adoption. Addi-
tionally, review adoption was found to influence destination choice. However, perceived review trust
does not moderate the relationship between review adoption and destination choice. Theoretically,
this study expands the Information Adoption Model by integrating destination choice as an outcome
and perceiving review trust as a moderating factor. It further refines the model by highlighting the
role of perceived diagnosticity in review adoption. This study provides several practical implications
for stakeholders in Bangladesh’s tourism industry.

Key words: Online review; Perceived review diagnosticity; Perceived review usefulness;
Perceived review trust; Destination choice; Information Adoption Model

Introduction 2023), offering numerous benefits to marketers and

customers. Marketers can utilize online reviews as
Online reviews (OR) are acknowledged as a a form of customer survey, gaining genuine insights
potential tool for tourism marketing and advertis- (Li et al., 2015) and leveraging them as digital
ing (Camilleri & Filieri, 2023; Olorunsola et al., word-of-mouth (López & Farzan, 2014) as tourists

Address correspondence to Md. Tariqul Islam, School of Hospitality, Tourism and Events, Taylor’s University, 47500, Subang Jaya,
Selangor, Malaysia. E-mail: tariqul.tonmoy812@[Link]

17
Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 18 ISLAM ET AL.

often heavily depend on online reviews when mak- incorporating moderating variables is essential to
ing decisions about their journeys, shaping their understanding the dynamics between independent
beliefs and perceptions of destinations and tour- and dependent variables, clarifying why certain
ism amenities (Cao et al., 2024; Nguyen & Tong, relationships occur. Thus, this study integrates per-
2022). The online review phenomenon is influ- ceived trust as a moderating variable, recognizing
enced by factors like user perceptions, demograph- its significant influence on individual perceptions,
ics, review quality, source credibility, and product as emphasized by Khan and Ul Abideen (2023).
dimensions (M. Lee & Youn, 2009; F. Wang et al., This study expands on existing research by includ-
2023). Despite extensive research in Asia, particu- ing perceived trust, providing a deeper understand-
larly Bangladesh, there is a gap in exploring online ing of the online review adoption process.
reviews from the domestic tourist perspective. Studies prior COVID-19 pandemic signifi-
In 2022, Bangladesh recorded 4.3 million out- cantly altered tourist perceptions and behaviors
bound tourists, 0.5 million inbound tourists, and (Olorunsola et al., 2023). Researchers have noted
20 million domestic tourists (Zaman, 2023). A that tourists are now more demanding (Herjanto
study revealed that 45% of Bangladeshi tourists et al., 2023) and focus on new satisfaction attributes
use online reviews for information on destinations, (Herjanto et al., 2024). Thus, updating research to
accommodations, and transport (Karim, 2019). address these changes is necessary to provide more
Since local and international tourists have differ- relevant findings and help tourist operators better
ent preferences (Stone & Nyaupane, 2019), cur- cater to evolving customer needs.
rent findings may only partially represent domestic Furthermore, tourists view online reviews as
tourists, emphasizing the need for further research. invaluable for mitigating travel risks (Yadav et al.,
Previous studies have highlighted the impact 2024). Building on this, scholars have explored
of online reviews on Bangladeshi consumers in online reviews from the Information Adoption
various tourism contexts, such as restaurant visit Model perspective (Camilleri & Filieri, 2023; Islam
intentions (Popy & Bappy, 2022), tourism service et al., 2023; Tapanainen et al., 2021). Despite includ-
purchases (Hossain et al., 2024), and tourist experi- ing various antecedents, existing studies still need to
ences (Rahman et al., 2022). However, research on be completed (Rahaman et al., 2022), highlighting
online review’s influence on domestic tourists’ des- the need to incorporate the moderating role of review
tination choices still needs to be conducted. Islam trust to enhance explanatory power and offer action-
et al. (2023) emphasized the role of perceptions in able strategies for travel agents and destinations.
adopting destination information, while Habiba
et al. (2022) found that social media comments
attracted locals to tourist spots. More recently, Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
Islam, Kumar et al. (2024) identified how vloggers
Online Reviews From the Information
and information credibility motivated domestic
Adoption Model
tourists to adopt online reviews, influencing their
destination decisions. Based on Kordrostami and Rahmani’s (2020)
Perception is crucial in influencing Bangla- conceptualization, our study defines online reviews
deshis’ adoption of online reviews for tourist des- (OR) as a tourist’s emotional statements about tour-
tination choices. Camilleri and Filieri (2023) and ism products or services made available to the pub-
Filieri (2015) highlighted that perceived diagnos- lic via digital platforms. Scholars suggest that OR
ticity plays a key role in motivating online review facilitate tourists to exchange (Alhemimah, 2019)
adoption, as it helps tourists assess destinations and gather essential travel information (Meng et al.,
more accurately. Based on this, the current research 2018). According to Alhemimah (2019), they influ-
introduces perceived diagnosticity as a new vari- ence tourists’ future travel planning and percep-
able. While this study explores the direct and indi- tions as well as determine tourist decisions. Despite
rect relationships between online review adoption these benefits, scholars suggest that tourists do not
and its antecedents, it does not include moderat- automatically adopt OR; instead, they carefully
ing variables. Rahaman et al. (2022) argued that screen, evaluate, and decide which credible reviews

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 19

warrant adoption (Islam et al., 2023). During their Information adoption is shaped by information
evaluation process, several factors, namely tourist usefulness and trust, which are influenced by infor-
personal-related factors (Islam et al., 2023), OR- mation quality and vlogger credibility. However,
related factors (Zhang et al., 2023); travel product- their model overlooks two critical aspects that the
related factors (Bordelon & Ferreira, 2017; Liang present study addresses. First, it does not include
et al., 2019), brand (Liu et al., 2022), and situation- perceived diagnosticity, a factor that, as Islam et al.
related factors (Lam et al., 2020) play an essential (2023) suggested, enhances tourists’ understanding
role in affecting and determining tourists’ decision. of information quality and determines their confi-
Although these factors are intertwined, Rietsche dence in adopting online reviews (OR) (Shi et al.,
et al. (2019) argued that personal-related factors 2023). As highlighted by Al-Adwan and Al-Horani
are essential to painting a big picture of OR. Thus, (2019), confidence is essential for business suc-
Kang et al. (2020) suggested extending the exist- cess, influencing customers’ perceived risk and
ing research by incorporating different elements of comfort. Incorporating perceived diagnosticity in
personal-related factors. this study will provide a deeper understanding of
Previous empirical evidence suggests that the the OR adoption process.
Information Adoption Model (IAM) is one of the Second, neither of the above studies consider
most suitable frameworks for investigating OR moderating variables, which Rahaman et al. (2022)
(Reddy et al., 2022), as this model allows scholars emphasized are crucial for identifying boundary con-
to extend by adding related parts (Park, 2020) to ditions and explaining their effects on relationships
increase the model’s explanatory power. Originally, between variables. To address this gap, the present
Sussman and Siegal (2003) introduced the IAM as study modifies the IAM model by explicitly intro-
a dual-process model influencing individual infor- ducing trust as a moderating variable in the relation-
mation adoption. This model suggests that infor- ship between review adoption and destination choice.
mation (central route) and source characteristics Trust, specifically in the digital world, is consid-
(peripheral route) are concurrently responsible ered the most important factor that motivates tour-
for information adoption. IAM was developed by ists to engage with the online platform and, more
integrating four variables: argument quality, source importantly, to enhance their loyalty (Bilgihan,
credibility, information usefulness, and informa- 2016). In the context of tourist destinations,
tion adoption. The ability of an argument to per- Srivastava et al. (2023) recently found that trust
suade listeners is referred to as argument quality moderates the relationship between destination
(Bhattacherjee & Sanford, 2006). According to brand experience and destination advocacy. How-
Martínez et al. (2020), source credibility indicates ever, how trust facilitates the relationship between
how trustworthy information recipients regard an review adoption and destination choice in Bangla-
information source. According to Sussman and desh remains to be discovered. This is important
Siegal (2003), information usefulness is the extent because, according to Ferrin and Gillespie (2010),
to which the recipient believes the knowledge will although the concept of trust is universal, trust can
help them make a better decision. Sirithanaphonchai be formed and expressed differently depending on
(2017) defined information adoption as individu- individual culture. Thus, the findings of the exist-
als’ deliberate use of information. ing study may not apply to the Bangladeshi con-
The IAM model has been widely applied to text. Consequently, investigating the moderating
assess the influence of OR on tourist destinations. role of trust in such relationships is crucial. It will
However, its application to Bangladeshi domestic guide scholars and travel destination operators in
tourists has yet to be explored. Islam et al. (2023) developing strategies for strengthening Bangla-
conducted a pioneering study to address this gap, deshi tourist destination choices.
modifying the original IAM model. They proposed
a straightforward, linear version that conceptual-
Review Adoption and its Antecedents
izes tourists’ adoption of reviews as being shaped
by OR characteristics such as quality, credibility, J. Lee and Kim (2020) defined review adoption
usefulness, and helpfulness. as the degree to which tourists are willing to accept

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 20 ISLAM ET AL.

and embrace meaningful OR content after verifying of product being reviewed (S. Shin et al., 2021).
its validity and credibility. Contemporary studies in Review rating allows tourists to confirm/discon-
the tourism destination field have proven that OR is firm whether the OR is helpful, review depth offers
the key to improving destination image (Lam et al., robust information, and review readability helps
2020). Marine-Roig and Huertas (2020) argued improve tourists’ understanding of the travel prod-
that the tourist’s cognitive, affective, and cona- ucts. Combining OR-related factors, reviewer pro-
tive state is responsible for such a positive image. files, and product type improves tourist confidence
Although these factors are inseparable, scholars (Ruiz-Mafe et al., 2018). Further, Chong et al.
revealed that cognitive factors, such as perception, (2022) argued that the more confident the tour-
are unique and dominant in determining destina- ist becomes, the more likely they are to adopt the
tion image (Marine-Roig & Huertas, 2020). Psy- behavior. Thus, we assume:
chologically, perception refers to a tourist’s ability
to conceive and comprehend related information or H2: The degree of perceived review diagnosticity
stimuli (Bhattacharyya et al., 2021). In the context positively leads to online review adoption.
of OR adoption, tourists may feel more selective
and careful in adopting such reviews. This shows
Perceived Review Usefulness
that tourists attempt to reduce their potential risks
(Marine-Roig & Huertas, 2020), particularly by Islam et al. (2024) defined perceived review
calculating the degree of perceived quality, diag- usefulness (RU) as the degree to which tourists
nosticity, usefulness, and credibility of such OR. perceive that utilizing OR will assist their deci-
sion-making process. Unlike review diagnosticity,
Leung (2021) revealed that the degree of RU is
Perceived Review Quality
determined solely by OR-related factors, namely,
Perceived review quality (RQ) refers to the review depth, review breadth, and review lan-
degree of persuasive power and argument quality guage style. This finding shows that tourists view
in an online message (S. Y. Shin et al., 2017). Exist- the comprehensiveness of review content as posi-
ing studies highlighted that OR quality influences tively perceived useful. Additionally, the review
the review receivers’ attitude (Abedi et al., 2020; novelty determines online perceived review useful-
Islam, Hossain et al., 2024). Quality is defined ness (Minh et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2023). These
by how accurate, timely, complete, and relevant scholars suggest that reviewing novelty embraces
the OR are (Bhaiswar et al., 2022; P. Wang et al., new understanding. Thus, when tourists perceive
2020). When tourists consider an OR to have OR as applicable, they adopt them (Kaur & Kaur,
logical arguments, they develop a favorable and 2023). Accordingly, we hypothesize:
positive attitude toward the review and vice versa
(Allard et al., 2020). Tourists may feel comfortable H3: The degree of perceived usefulness positively
and more relaxed about adopting such OR. Accord- leads to the adoption of online reviews.
ingly, we hypothesize:
Perceived Review Credibility
H1: The degree of perceived review quality posi-
tively leads to online review adoption. Perceived review credibility (RC) signifies how
tourists perceive OR as authentic, factual, and
believable (E. Shin et al., 2021). The tourism indus-
Perceived Review Diagnosticity
try has been severely impacted by COVID-19,
Perceived review diagnosticity (RD) indicates prompting global tourist destinations to consolidate
the degree to which tourists anticipate that OR will and rebuild their appeal by reshaping their destina-
assist in assessing their travel destination (Chua & tion images. For instance, Vietnam has diversified
Banerjee, 2014). The strength of RD is influenced its tourism offerings by focusing on natural attrac-
by several factors, such as the review rating, depth, tions, promoting sea-based tourism, and opening
readability, reviewer characteristics, and the type access to untouched islands (Vu et al., 2022). When

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 21

tourists encounter such new images, they may need (Rahaman et al., 2022). In the long run, such OR
to be more familiar with them. Therefore, they adoption improves destination appeal (Bigne et al.,
try to find information that can help them under- 2019) and leads to destination choice (DC). Thus,
stand how such images will fit their travel prefer- this study hypothesizes:
ences. In this information-seeking process, tourists
may visit, read, and evaluate OR (Bhaiswar et al., H6: The degree of perceived review trust positively
2022). Thus, credible OR may increase such adop- moderates the relationship between review adop-
tion online, especially without a new destination tion and destination choice.
image experience (E. Shin et al., 2021). Based on
this argument, therefore, it is reasonable to assume:
Methodology
H4: The degree of perceived review credibility The methodology section explains the measure-
positively leads to online review adoption. ment items adapted from the existing study, sample
size, sampling, and data collection procedure. Fig-
ure 1 illustrates this study’s conceptual research
Review Adoption and its Consequences
framework.
As suggested earlier by J. Lee and Kim (2020),
review adoption (RA) is a barometer of tourists’
Questionnaire Development
willingness to accept and embrace meaningful OR
and Measurement Scale
content. Generally, Gunawan and Huarng (2015)
suggested that the degree of review adoption deter- The questionnaire was developed in English and
mines future behavior. In the context of tourism, divided into two sections. The first section focused
such adoption is responsible for future trip plan- on the demographic profile, including gender, age,
ning intention (Kaur & Kaur, 2022), positive des- education level, occupation, marital status, and
tination image (Lam et al., 2020), and destination travel frequency of the respondents. All the demo-
choice (Liu et al., 2019). According to Y. C. Chen graphic variables were categorical and measured
et al. (2014), destination choice reflects the tour- using predefined categories. The demographic pro-
ist’s inclination to explore the destination described files presented in Table 1 reflect a comprehensive
in the OR. Considering these findings, the indi- overview of the respondents’ characteristics.
viduals’ destination choice is associated with The second section contained 27 items to mea-
adopting travel vlog information. Thus, this study sure the seven variables outlined in the concep-
hypothesizes: tual framework (see Fig. 1). Each variable was

H5: The degree of review adoption positively leads

to destination choice.

The Moderating Role of Perceived Review Trust

Perceived review trust (RT) is customers’ percep-
tions of OR’s originality and reliability (Borchert
& Heisel, 2022). However, OR are problematic in
today’s digital environment because some are fake,
fraudulent, and deceptive (Longwell, 2021). There-
fore, it is challenging to ascertain the truthfulness
or accuracy of such reviews (Cross, 2022). Scholars
suggest that reviewing trust reduces doubts (Evans
et al., 2021) and increases confidence (Abdelhalim
et al., 2018) and helpfulness (Choi & Leon, 2023).
Tourists with such experiences tend to adopt OR Figure 1. Conceptual research framework.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 22 ISLAM ET AL.

Table 1 Evans (2018) and Filieri (2015) that measured the

Demographic Profile of the Respondents degree to which tourists integrate OTR into their
decision-making process. These items assisted in
Variable/Category Frequency (%)
assessing how OTR facilitate more accessible and
Gender more effective destination-choosing decisions, as
Female 126 (40.91%) well as the influential role of OTR in finalizing
Male 182 (59.09%)
Age travel plans.
18–24 years 149 (48.38%) Moreover, review credibility (RC) was mea-
25–34 years 98 (31.82%) sured by four items adapted from Filieri (2015) to
35–44 years 39 (12.66%)
45–54 years 14 (4.55%) assess individuals’ perceptions of the reviewer’s
55 years and above 8 (2.59%) trustworthiness, expertise, and credibility. Measure-
Level of education ment items were used to capture the perceived reli-
Secondary 17 (5.52%)
Higher secondary 27 (8.77%) ability of the reviewer. Review diagnosticity (RD)
University 248 (80.52%) was measured using three items adapted from Jiang
Others 16 (5.19%) et al. (2021) to examine how well OTR help tour-
Occupation
Business 28 (9.09%)
ists evaluate and understand a destination. Measure-
Govt. service 26 (8.44%) ment items were included to capture the informative
Private service 62 (20.13%) role of reviews in the decision-making process.
Student 163 (52.92%)
Others 29 (9.41%)
Review quality (RQ) was assessed using four items
Marital status adapted from Alhemimah (2019) and Filieri (2015),
Married 94 (30.52%) focusing on the accuracy, relevance, and sufficiency
Unmarried 208 (67.53%) of the information provided in OTR. Measurement
Others 6 (1.95%)
Travelling frequency in the last items were included to measure tourists’ perceptions
12 months of review quality. Review trust (RT) was comprised
Less than 2 times 69 (22.40%) of four items adapted from Alhemimah (2019) and
2–3 times 137 (44.48%)
4–5 times 70 (22.73%) Erkan and Evans (2018), which aimed to capture
6 times and above 32 (10.39%) the level of trust tourists place in OTR content.
Measurement items were included to gauge the reli-
ability and credibility of the information presented
measured through multiple items based on exist- in reviews. Last, review usefulness (RU) was mea-
ing literature, ensuring that the questions aligned sured using three items adapted from Alhemimah
with the underlying variables and objectives of the (2019) and Erkan and Evans (2018), which assessed
study. All the measurement items included in the how helpful tourists found OTR in facilitating their
questionnaire were adapted from previously pub- decision-making process.
lished studies. A 5-point Likert scale was employed Ruel et al. (2016) recommended conducting a
to measure the constructs where 1 was the mini- pretest and pilot study to ensure that the survey
mum value (strongly disagree) and the maximum questions are articulated and that the response
value was 5 (strongly agree), as it is convenient for options are relevant, comprehensive, and mutually
the researcher and the respondents (Dawes, 2008). exclusive from the researchers’ and the respon-
Destination choice (DC) was measured using dents’ points of view. The current study incor-
four items adapted from Alhemimah (2019) and porated pretesting of the questionnaire by two
Arora and Lata (2020), which captured how expo- industry professionals and two academics. A few
sure to online travel reviews (OTR) influences tour- minor modifications were carried out according to
ists’ intention and willingness to visit a destination. their feedback. The questionnaire was sent to 30
Measurement items were included to assess the respondents for the pilot study (Teresi et al., 2022).
increase in intention and explore the likelihood of The pilot study result demonstrated no need for
choosing a destination and using OTR as a tool for additional modifications to the questionnaires, sig-
information gathering. In addition, review adoption nifying the questionnaire’s robustness and appro-
(RA) included four items adapted from Erkan and priateness for the intended research.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 23

Research Population, Sample Size, After data screening, 308 samples were taken for
and Sampling Method data analysis. The respondents’ demographic pro-
file revealed that most of the respondents (59.09%)
The present study is a survey-based study and
were male and between the ages of 18 and 24
uses a deductive approach. The research population
years old (48.38%) (see Table 1). In addition, most
comprised Bangladeshi individuals at least 18 years
respondents were students (52.92%) at university
old and familiar with online travel reviews. Since
level (80.52%). It was also observed that most
no existing statistics are available for this specific
respondents were unmarried (67.53%). Moreover,
group, G*Power analysis was used to determine the
most respondents claimed their travel frequency in
minimum sample size, as suggested by Faul et al.
the past 12 months was 2–3 times (44.48%).
(2009). With a confidence level of 95%, a sample
size of 146 was ascertained by utilizing G*Power
analysis (Faul et al., 2009). Data Analysis Tools and Techniques
The study employed a nonprobability, purposive
This study utilized two software tools for data
sampling method, which was chosen to ensure that
analysis: SPSS (version 28) and SmartPLS (version
data were collected from individuals who met spe-
[Link]). SPSS was employed to analyze the demo-
cific criteria relevant to the research (Sekaran, 2016).
graphic profile of the respondents, assess common
The criteria for selecting the study sample were: (1)
method bias (CMB), and perform data cleaning.
participants had to be at least 18 years old, ensur-
The data cleaning involved identifying and han-
ing that respondents were legally adults and able to
dling missing values, detecting outliers, and ensur-
provide informed consent, and (2) participants had
ing the data were accurately coded and prepared for
to be familiar with OTR, as the study focused on the
further analysis. This step was crucial to maintain-
impact of OTR on tourists’ destination choices. This
ing the dataset’s integrity and quality before pro-
ensured that the sample consisted of individuals who
ceeding with more advanced statistical analyses.
had prior exposure to OTR and could provide mean-
SmartPLS was employed to conduct partial least
ingful responses based on their experiences.
squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM),
The purposive sampling method was particu-
a statistical technique for examining complex rela-
larly suitable for this study because it allowed the
tionships between multiple variables. The data
researchers to target individuals familiar with OTR
analysis process using SmartPLS was systemati-
in Dhaka (the capital of Bangladesh), which was
cally conducted in two distinct stages, ensuring a
necessary for the study’s focus.
thorough evaluation of the underlying measure-
ment and structural models.
In the first stage, the measurement model was
Data Collection Procedure
evaluated to assess the validity and reliability of
The data were collected through a face-to-face the constructs. Additionally, model fit indices were
survey between April 15 and July 15, 2023 in assessed to determine the overall adequacy of the
Dhaka city, targeting relevant locations such as measurement model, ensuring that it meets the
educational institutions, retail malls, and public required statistical thresholds for robust analysis.
transportation stations. The researcher visited the Once the measurement model was deemed satis-
above locations, where participants were selected factory, the analysis proceeded to the second stage,
and approached for the survey. To ensure the eli- which involved assessing the structural model.
gibility of participants, an oral screening question This stage focused on examining the relationships
was asked (Are you a resident of Bangladesh, at between the latent constructs, as proposed in the
least 18 years old, and familiar with online travel research framework.
reviews?). Only those who met these criteria were
included in the survey. This method allowed the
Common Method Bias (CMB)
researchers to gather data from 322 respondents,
ensuring that the sample consisted of individuals All the respondents were informed that their
relevant to the study’s objectives. answers would be kept private and never shared.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 24 ISLAM ET AL.

Furthermore, to evaluate the CMB in the pres- and discriminant validity is essential for establish-
ent research, 27 items from seven constructs were ing the model’s validation. The internal consistency
assessed using Harman’s single-factor test. The total reliability was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha
variance extracted by a single component in the (CA) and composite reliability (CR). The conver-
present study is 48.169%, below the recommended gent validity was assessed using the average vari-
threshold value of 50% (Podsakoff et al., 2003), ance extracted (AVE). According to the statistical
indicating no statistically significant issue with results, all the CA and CR values are >0.7, which
CMB. Furthermore, all the inner VIF values were implies that the research has appropriate internal
below 5, indicating no CMB issues in the study. consistency (Hair et al., 2021) (see Table 2). In
contrast, the study’s acceptable convergent valid-
ity was confirmed by AVE values over 0.5 (Hair
Result and Findings
et al., 2021) (see Table 2). Furthermore, all item
The current study uses PLS-SEM through Smart- loading values (see Table 2) were found to be more
PLS (v. [Link]) to evaluate the measurement and significant than 0.7, within an acceptable range
structural model. According to Hair et al. (2021), (Hair et al., 2021), except for RC4. Since RC4 had
assessing internal consistency, convergent validity, a greater degree of reliability, it was not eliminated.

Table 2
Assessment of the Measurement Model
Construct Item Loadings CA CR AVE

Destination choice (DC) 0.876 0.916 0.732

DC1 0.897
DC2 0.901
DC3 0.874
DC4 0.742
Review adoption (RA) 0.836 0.891 0.671
RA1 0.868
RA2 0.786
RA3 0.848
RA4 0.771
Perceived review credibility (RC) 0.849 0.901 0.698
RC1 0.855
RC2 0.921
RC3 0.888
RC4 0.651
Perceived review diagnosticity (RD) 0.908 0.942 0.844
RD1 0.930
RD2 0.927
RD3 0.898
Perceived review quality (RQ) 0.927 0.948 0.820
RQ1 0.900
RQ2 0.906
RQ3 0.895
RQ4 0.920
Perceived review trust (RT) 0.916 0.941 0.799
RT1 0.896
RT2 0.897
RT3 0.889
RT4 0.893
Perceived review usefulness (RU) 0.886 0.921 0.746
RU1 0.903
RU2 0.860
RU3 0.822
RU4 0.868

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 25

Table 3
Assessment of Discriminant Validity
Construct DC RA RC RD RQ RT RU

Fornell–Larcker criterion
Destination choice (DC) 0.856
Review adoption (RA) 0.684 0.819
Review credibility (RC) 0.663 0.71 0.835
Review diagnosticity (RD) 0.693 0.688 0.766 0.919
Review quality (RQ) 0.496 0.654 0.657 0.678 0.906
Review trust (RT) 0.572 0.693 0.519 0.512 0.588 0.894
Review usefulness (RU) 0.433 0.554 0.603 0.594 0.646 0.518 0.864
Heterotrait–monotrait ratio
Review adoption (RA) 0.789
Review credibility (RC) 0.763 0.838
Review diagnosticity (RD) 0.778 0.784 0.880
Review quality (RQ 0.551 0.74 0.748 0.739
Review trust (RT) 0.638 0.791 0.592 0.562 0.637
Review usefulness (RU) 0.49 0.641 0.711 0.659 0.709 0.574

Additionally, discriminant validity demonstrates data. The current study assessed model fit through
the association between the constructs and shows standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)
how one construct is differentiated from another. and normed fit index (NFI). The PLS-SEM results
Hetrotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratio and Fornell– showed an SRMR value of 0.065 and an NFI value
Lacker’s criteria were used in the present study of 0.842. The SRMR value of 0.065 indicates a
to evaluate discriminant validity (see Table 3). good model fit, as it falls well below the commonly
Acceptable discriminant validity was demonstrated accepted threshold of 0.08 (Henseler et al., 2014).
by Fornell–Lacker’s criteria value, which showed The NFI value of 0.842 suggests an acceptable fit,
that the estimated square root of the AVE values though it falls below the ideal threshold of 0.90.
was more significant than the construct’s intercor- However, values between 0.80 and 0.90 are gener-
relations with the other constructs in the model ally acceptable (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Overall, the
(Fornell & Larcker, 1981). However, all the HTMT current model demonstrates a good fit for the data.
values were below 0.9, ensuring the present study’s
discriminant validity (Henseler et al., 2015).
Assessment of the Structural Model
After assessing the measurement model, the
Assessment of Model Fit
validity of the structural model needs to be evalu-
In PLS-SEM, it is essential to assess model ated. As per the structural model result (see Table
fit to evaluate how well the model represents the 4), the R2 values in the present study indicated the

Table 4
Assessment of the Structural Model and Hypotheses Test Result
Hypothesized Original Effect Inner
Relationship Sample (O) t Statistic p Value Remarks Size (f 2) Remarks VIF

H1: RQ → RA 0.234 3.643 0.000 Supported 0.057 Small 2.318

H2: RD → RA 0.231 3.722 0.000 Supported 0.046 Small 2.829
H3: RU → RA 0.058 0.989 0.323 Not supported 0.004 No effect 1.929
H4: RC → RA 0.231 3.722 0.000 Supported 0.046 Small 2.829
H5: RA → DC 0.535 6.759 0.000 Supported 0.271 Medium 2.064
H6: RT × RA → DC −0.036 0.96 0.337 Not supported 0.004 No effect 1.215

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 26 ISLAM ET AL.

model’s strengths as moderate (perceived review 2021). Therefore, H3 (perceived review useful-
adoption 0.589) and weak (destination choice ness > review adoption) and H6 (perceived review
0.488) (Hair et al., 2021). The researchers used trust × review adoption > destination choice) are
Cohen’s f 2 to identify the effect size of the predictor not supported; the other four hypotheses H1 (per-
variables (see Table 4). The statistical outcome indi- ceived review quality > review adoption), H2 (per-
cated that large, medium, and small effect size was ceived review diagnosticity > review adoption), H4
found (Cohen, 2013). In addition, assessing mul- (perceived review credibility > review adoption),
ticollinearity is important as it can lead to skewed and H5 (review adoption > destination choice) are
or misleading results when a researcher or analyst supported (see Table 4; Fig. 2).
attempts to determine how well each independent
variable can be used most effectively to predict or
Discussion
understand the dependent variable in a structural
model. Pallant (2020) mentioned that the inner VIF The findings reveal that perceived review qual-
values between 0.1 and 10 indicate no existence ity (RQ), perceived review diagnosticity (RD),
of multicollinearity. In the present study, all the and perceived review credibility (RC) are cru-
inner VIF values ranged between 1.215 to 2.829. cial in strengthening tourists’ online review (OR)
Therefore, no multicollinearity problem exists adoption. Accurate, timely, complete, and relevant
in this study. All the Q2 values (0.478 and 0.576) reviews are most valuable, more informative, and
were above 0, indicating predictive relevancy in convincing for travelers (Liu et al., 2022). The
the model (Hair et al., 2021). Bootstrapping was COVID-19 pandemic has made people more cau-
performed by PLS-SEM with 5,000 resamples to tious about their travel choices. In Bangladesh,
obtain the t statistics and p value for determining where more than half the population felt the gov-
the result of the hypotheses. The hypothesis was ernment was not transparent about the pandemic
supported if the t statistics were more than 1.96 (Anwar et al., 2020), many turned to OR for reli-
and the p values were less than 0.05 (Hair et al., able information. Tourists tend to favor recent,

Figure 2. Bootstrapping outcome with p values.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 27

detailed reviews that help them feel more confident information. (4) As the respondents of this study are
and reduce the risks of traveling. As per risk avoid- local tourists, there is a possibility that these tour-
ance theory, travelers use high-quality reviews to ists may have family members, friends, or acquain-
navigate uncertainty and avoid stressful situations, tances in such travel destinations. Therefore, they
making them more likely to trust and follow these do not see such helpful information as needed.
reviews when they feel more in control. Next, the findings also found that review adop-
Current findings also highlight that RD plays a tion positively affects destination choice. The more
crucial role in RA. RD refers to how well OR pro- tourists adopt such an OR, the more likely they will
vides adequate and consistent tourist information select that destination. As J. Lee and Kim (2020)
(Qiu et al., 2012). Hence, RD acts as a tool for discussed earlier, review adoption is a key to future
evaluating whether review attributes, like ratings, tourist behavior. To Alhemimah (2019), this expla-
align with the depth and logic of the review content. nation suggests that review adoption is a product
When rating, content depth, and sensibility are in of thorough information scrutiny of the content of
sync, tourists view the review as highly diagnostic. such a review. This makes tourists feel at ease and
This makes the review more valuable and trustwor- trust the reviews more. As a result, the final step
thy, increasing its reliability and likelihood of being is for them to decide by following the suggested
adopted by tourists (Kusumasondjaja et al., 2012). destinations. This study confirms Liu et al.’s (2019)
Further, RC significantly influences tourists’ adop- study, which found that online adoption influences
tion of OR. Reviewer’s characteristics including the future destination choice.
number of destinations visited, miles traveled, years Surprisingly, this study shows that perceived
of travel experience, and reviewer badges are essen- review trust insignificantly moderates the rela-
tial for RC (Sharma & Aggrawal, 2020) and reflect tionship between review adoption and destination
the reviewer’s expertise. Torres et al. (2014) argued choice. In other words, the findings suggest that
that expert reviewers are more objective. They pro- perceived review trust (RT) does affect tourists’
vide technical insights on areas where destinations destination choices. This suggests that once Bangla-
can improve and offer constructive suggestions. deshi tourists have decided to adopt a review, their
They often mention unavoidable issues, like delays level of trust in that review could be more signifi-
in transportation or failure to meet specific tourist cant in their ultimate destination choice. As Kumar
needs (Pavlou & Dimoka, 2006). These balanced et al. (2021) suggested, a possible explanation of
and honest assessments make expert reviews more these findings is that RT is factored in shaping
trustworthy (Kusumasondjaja et al., 2012), leading review adoption and further influences destination
tourists to rely on them when making decisions. choice. Once trust is founded, it may not have any
In contrast, the current study found that perceived additional influences on review adoption.
review usefulness does not affect online adoption.
This means tourists do not see perceived usefulness
as crucial as other OR attributes. This phenomenon Theoretical and Practical Implications
can be explained as follows. (1) Online usefulness
Theoretical Implications
may not necessarily be directly relevant to tourists’
needs or preferences. For example, OR offers a lot This study offers several theoretical implications.
of helpful information, such as the location of the First, tourist destination choice has been added to
nearest police station or hospital. Although this the current model as it is the ultimate behavioral
information is essential, tourists do not think it is response of the individual. The present study has
relevant as they do not expect any problems during contributed by including and explaining tourists’
their vacation. (2) This information may be consid- destination choices as the next phase of adopting
ered essential information they can quickly obtain information that emphasizes the understanding of
through their mobile phone or other advanced elec- how tourists use information from OTR to assist
tronic device. (3) Some of our respondents used their travel decisions. The outcomes of this study
travel agents to coordinate their travel plans; there- provide insight into the impact of OTR on tourists’
fore, they expect their travel agent to provide such choice of destinations.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 28 ISLAM ET AL.

In addition, this study contributes to the theo- OTR. Responding to such comments positively
retical understanding of online review adoption by when there is irrelevant information is suggested.
extending the Information Adoption Model (IAM) This way, tourism destination operators can bal-
with critical modifications specific to the context of ance such details and increase the credibility and
Bangladeshi domestic tourists. Unlike prior stud- usefulness of the OTR.
ies (e.g., Islam et al., 2023, 2024), which omitted The insignificant relationship between review
perceived diagnosticity, this study emphasizes its usefulness and review adoption implies that tour-
significant role in enhancing tourists’ confidence ism marketers and OTR platforms should focus on
in adopting online travel reviews, aligning with the more than just enhancing the perceived usefulness
arguments of Shi et al. (2023). Additionally, while of reviews to increase adoption rates. Instead, they
existing research (e.g., Srivastava et al., 2023) iden- should consider a more holistic approach, ensuring
tified trust as a key moderating factor in various that reviews are helpful, credible, trustworthy, and
decision-making processes, this study found trust addressing other influential factors. Moreover, for
does not significantly moderate the relationship tourism practitioners and OTR platforms, the insig-
between review adoption and destination choice, nificant moderating role of perceived review trust
suggesting cultural nuances in how trust operates between review adoption and destination choice
within the IAM framework. indicates that while building trust in reviews is
Furthermore, the insignificant role of informa- essential, it may not directly influence destination
tion usefulness challenges its traditional centrality choice once a review is adopted. Efforts to improve
in IAM (Bhattacherjee & Sanford, 2006), indicat- the impact of reviews on destination choices should
ing that factors like quality, diagnosticity, and cred- focus on ensuring that reviews resonate with tourists’
ibility hold greater theoretical relevance in specific preferences and align with another decisive factor.
contexts. These findings refine the theoretical Travel agencies can design budget-friendly,
boundaries of the IAM model, providing a deeper experience-focused travel packages to appeal to
understanding of its applicability across diverse young and student tourists and enhance engage-
cultural and situational contexts. ment with tourism destinations. Social media cam-
paigns emphasizing peer recommendations and
authentic reviews can effectively engage this tech-
Practical Implications
savvy demographic. Individuals in private service
Concerning practical implications, the study con- represent a valuable segment; therefore, tailored
tributes to Bangladesh’s tourism industry operators travel packages focusing on short weekend get-
(e.g., government, policymakers, and industry play- aways or flexible itineraries can accommodate their
ers). It has been found that OTR influences tourists’ work schedules. For frequent travelers (4–5 times
destination choices; hence, decision-makers need to or more annually), destinations can introduce loy-
pay much attention to OTR in various ways. First, alty programs and personalized offers to encourage
the study found that RU insignificantly influences repeat visits and strengthen customer relationships.
RA. This means irrelevant and too general infor- Last, tourism destination operators should also
mation should not have been added to reviews. To offer small incentives to domestic visitors to par-
anticipate this issue, tourism destination operators ticipate and share their experiences online. For
are recommended to encourage helping their visit- example, they can collaborate with other tourism
ing domestic tourists by preparing and providing a operators, such as retailers and restaurants, to give
review form with specific items or questions to be away souvenirs when their domestic visitors pay an
reviewed. To illustrate, questions like “Which spot entrance fee or visit local restaurants or gift shops.
is the best spot to take a sunset in X destination?”
or “What new items did they find at the X desti-
Conclusion, Limitations,
nation, and why is it interesting to them?” These
and Future Research Directions
questions will guide domestic tourists to focus their
review on such questions. Second, tourism opera- OR is critical in the tourism industry, influenc-
tors are also advised to pay consistent attention to ing tourists’ behavioral intentions. The study was

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 29

conducted to identify how online travel reviews Al-Adwan, A. S., & Al-Horani, M. A. (2019). Boosting
impact tourists’ destination choices. The findings customer e-loyalty: An extended scale of online service
quality. Information, 10(12), 1–27.
indicated that apart from perceived review useful- Alhemimah, A. (2019). The Influence of Online Reviews on
ness (RU), perceived review quality (RQ), per- Saudi Consumers’ Tourism Destination Choices (Doc-
ceived review diagnosticity (RD), and perceived toral dissertation, University of Plymouth).
review credibility (RC) significantly influence Allard, T., Dunn, L. H., & White, K. (2020). Negative
tourists’ OR adoption. At the same time, perceived reviews, positive impact: Consumer empathetic respond-
ing to unfair word of mouth. Journal of Marketing,
review trust (RT) does not moderate the relation- 84(4), 86–108.
ship between review adoption (RA) and destination Anwar, S., Araf, Y., Newz Khan, A., Ullah, M. A., Hoque,
choice (DC). Finally, RA was found to affect DC. N., Sarkar, B., Reshad, R. A. I., Islam, R., Ali, N., &
Considering different cultural contexts and vary- Hosen, M. J. (2020). Women’s knowledge, attitude and
ing levels of digital literacy, the findings could be perceptions toward COVID-19 in lower-middle-income
countries: A representative cross-sectional study in
adapted to enhance marketing strategies, tourism Bangladesh. Frontiers in Public Health, 8, 1–10.
platforms, and review systems across various global Arora, N., & Lata, S. (2020). YouTube channels influence on
tourism markets. The current research makes valu- destination visit intentions: An empirical analysis on the
able contributions in both theoretical and practical base of information adoption model. Journal of Indian
aspects. Theoretically, the current study extends the Business Research, 12(1), 23–42.
Bhaiswar, R., Chawla, D., & Meenakshi, N. (2022). The influ-
IAM theory by RD, RT, and DC. Practically, sev- ence of eWOM communications on intended online pur-
eral managerial implications were provided based chases: A literature review using TCCM framework and
on the result of this study. Although this study con- future research agenda. International Journal of Indian
tributes to the existing body of knowledge within Culture and Business Management, 26(3), 328–361.
the domain of academic research, a few limitations Bhattacharyya, S., Konar, A., Raza, H., & Khasnobish, A.
(2021). Brain-computer interfaces for perception, learn-
cannot be avoided. First, our current OR adoption ing, and motor control. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 15,
model is oversimplified. In the future, researchers 758104.
should expand this model by incorporating differ- Bhattacherjee, A., & Sanford, C. (2006). Influence processes
ent variables, such as emotions, values, and other for information technology acceptance: An elaboration
psychological elements that may improve its power. likelihood model. MIS Quarterly, 30(4), 805–825.
Bigne, E., Ruiz, C., & Curras-Perez, R. (2019). Destination
Second, our survey was conducted and gathered in appeal through digitalized comments. Journal of Busi-
Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. This data collec- ness Research, 101, 447–453.
tion may only represent urban residents and may Bilgihan, A. (2016). Gen Y customer loyalty in online shop-
hinder the generalizability of the study’s findings. ping: An integrated model of trust, user experience, and
Thus, future researchers should also include rural branding. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 103–113.
Borchert, A., & Heisel, M. (2022). The role of trustworthi-
or non-urban respondents. ness facets for developing social media applications: A
structured literature review. Information, 13(1), 1–21.
ORCID Bordelon, L. A., & Ferreira, S. L. (2017). Tourist photo-
graphs and destination imagery on social media: Read-
Md. Tariqul Islam: [Link] ing the Stellenbosch Winelands through a tourist lens.
Halimin Herjanto: [Link] Tourism Review International, 21(3), 317–329.
Jeetesh Kumar: [Link] Camilleri, M. A., & Filieri, R. (2023). Customer satisfaction
Muslim Amin: [Link] and loyalty with online consumer reviews: Factor affect-
ing revisit intentions. International Journal of Hospital-
References ity Management, 114, 103575.
Cao, C., Ramachandran, S., Siow, M. L., Subramaniam, T.,
Abdelhalim, E., Yuan, Y., & Head, M. (2018). Understand- & Liu, L. (2024). The impact of social media on wine
ing trust in online reviews – research in progress. In tourists’ decision-making intentions: An empirical study
Proceedings 2018 SIGHCI. [Link] using the elaboration likelihood model. Tourism Review
[Link]?article=1000&context=sighci2018 International, 28(3), 233–250.
Abedi, E., Ghorbanzadeh, D., & Rahehagh, A. (2020). Influence Chen, K., Tsai, C. F., Hu, Y. H., & Hu, C. W. (2024). The
of eWOM information on consumers’ behavioral intentions effect of review visibility and diagnosticity on review
in mobile social networks: Evidence of Iran. Journal of helpfulness—An accessibility-diagnosticity theory per-
Advances in Management Research, 17(1), 84–109. spective. Decision Support Systems, 178, 114145.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 30 ISLAM ET AL.

Chen, Y. C., Shang, R. A., & Li, M. J. (2014). The effects for Bangladesh. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and
of perceived relevance of travel blogs’ content on the Sports, 65, 32–41.
behavioral intention to visit a tourist destination. Com- Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M.,
puters in Human Behavior, 30, 787–799. Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares
Choi, H. S., & Leon, S. (2023). When trust cues help help- structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A
fulness: Investigating the effect of trust cues on online workbook. Springer International Publishing.
review helpfulness using big data survey based on the Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M.,
Amazon platform. Electronic Commerce Research, Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., Ketchen, Jr., D. J.,
1–28. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Calantone, R. J. (2014).
Chong, L., Zhang, G., Goucher-Lambert, K., Kotovsky, K., Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on
& Cagan, J. (2022). Human confidence in artificial intel- Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organizational Research
ligence and in themselves: The evolution and impact Methods, 17(2), 182–209.
of confidence on adoption of AI advice. Computers in Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new
Human Behavior, 127, 107018. criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-
Chua, A. Y. K., & Banerjee, S. (2014). Developing a theory based structural equation modelling. Journal of the
of diagnosticity for online review. In Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.
International Multi-Conference of Engineers and Com- Herjanto, H., Amin, M., & Goains, S. (2023). Couples-
puting Scientists, Hong Kong. travelers’ hotel satisfaction attributes: Thai perspectives.
Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behav- ASEAN Journal on Hospitality and Tourism, 21(2), 14–31.
ioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. Herjanto, H., Garza, R. F., & Amin, M. (2024). LGBTQ
Cross, B. (2022). Up to 30% of online reviews are fake and hotel selection criteria: A thematic analysis method.
most consumers can’t tell the difference. [Link] Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7(4), 2199–2215.
[Link]/news/local/up-to-30-of-online-reviews-are- [Link]
fake-and-most-consumers-cant-tell-the-difference Hossain, K., Kumar, S., Shabbir, R., & Redwanuzzaman,
Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according R. (2024). Purchasing tourism services through online
to the number of scale points used? An experiment using travel agency: Does electronic word-of-mouth have
5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Jour- influence? An empirical study on Bangladeshi tourists.
nal of Market Research, 50(1), 61–104. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 54(2), 771–783.
Erkan, I., & Evans, C. (2016). The influence of eWOM in [Link]
social media on consumers’ purchase intentions: An Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit
extended approach to information adoption. Computers indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional
in Human Behavior, 61, 47–55. criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Evans, A. M., Stavrova, O., & Rosenbusch, H. (2021). Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Expressions of doubt and trust in online user reviews. Islam, M. T., Hossain, M. I., Saleh, R. A., Kumar, J., &
Computer in Human Behavior, 114, 106556. Konar, R. (2024). Facebook reviews and consumers’
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). food purchase behaviour in cloud kitchens: The moder-
Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for ating role of product knowledge. Asia-Pacific Journal of
correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Innovation in Hospitality and Tourism, 13(1), 127–146.
Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. Islam, M. T., Hussin, S. R., & Yee, W. F. (2023). What drives
Ferrin, D. L., & Gillespie, N. (2010). Trust differences travelers’ adoption of online travel reviews? Integrat-
across national–societal cultures: Much to do, or much ing helpfulness with information adoption factor. Asia-
ado about nothing? In M. N. K. Saunders, D. Skinner, Pacific Journal of Innovation in Hospitality & Tourism,
G. Dietz, N. Gillespie, & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Organi- 12(1), 143–161.
zational trust: A cultural perspective (pp. 42–86). Cam- Islam, M. T., Kumar, J., Hussin, S. R., & Yee, W. F. (2024).
bridge University Press. Camera to compass: Unravelling the impact of travel
Filieri, R. (2015). What makes online reviews helpful? A vlogs on tourist visit intentions. Academica Turistica-
diagnosticity-adoption framework to explain informa- Tourism and Innovation Journal, 17(2), 163–177.
tional and normative influences in e-WOM. Journal of Jiang, Q., Chan, C. S., Eichelberger, S., Ma, H., &
Business Research, 68(6), 1261–1270. Pikkemaat, B. (2021). Sentiment analysis of online des-
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation tination image of Hong Kong held by mainland Chinese
models with unobservable variables and measurement tourists. Current Issues in Tourism, 24(17), 2501–2522.
error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Kang, T. C., Hung, S. Y., & Huang, A. H. (2020). The adop-
Research, 18(3), 382–388. tion of online product information: Cognitive and affec-
Gunawan, D. D., & Huarng, K. H. (2015). Viral effects of tive evolutions. Journal of Internet Commerce, 19(4),
social network and media on consumers’ purchase inten- 373–403.
tion. Journal of Business Research, 68(11), 2237–2241, Karim, Z. (2019). The role of social media on tourism
Habiba, M., & Lina, M. A. H. F. Y. (2023). Social media pro- marketing: An empirical study on university students in
motions of tourism and hospitality industry: Implications Bangladesh. Journal of Management Research, 2, 21–38.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 ONLINE TRAVEL REVIEWS AND TOURIST DESTINATION CHOICES 31

Kaur, J., & Kaur, J. (2023). Investigating the credibility of Marine-Roig, E., & Huertas, A. (2020). How safety affects
online travel reviews adoption trip planning intention destination image projected through online travel review.
among Indian travelers. Turizam, 27(2), 66–91. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 18,
Khan, W. A., & Ul Abideen, Z. (2023). Effects of behav- 100469.
ioural intention on usage behaviour of digital wallet: The Martínez, P., Herrero, Á., & García-de los Salmones, M. D.
mediating role of perceived risk and moderating role of M. (2020). Determinants of eWOM on hospitality CSR
perceived service quality and perceived trust. Future issues. In Facebook we trust? Journal of Sustainable
Business Journal, 9(73), 1–15. Tourism, 28(10), 1479–1497.
Kordrostami, E., & Rahmani, V. (2020). Investigating Meng, F., Dipietro, R. B., Gerdes, J. H., Kline, S., & Avant,
conflicting online review information: Evidence from T. (2018). How hotel responses to negative online
[Link]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Ser- reviews affect customers’ perception of hotel image and
vices, 55, 102125. behavioral intent: An exploratory investigation. Tourism
Kumar, S., Talwar, S., Krishnan, S., Kaur, P., & Dhir, A. Review International, 22(1), 23–39.
(2021). Purchasing natural personal care products in the Minh, N. H., Hai, L. S., Phi, N. A., Duyen, L. B. T., & Giang,
era of fake news? The moderation effect of brand trust. L. T. Q. (2024). The impact of TikTok UGC videos on
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 63, 102668. online purchase intention: Mediating role of cognitive
Kusumasondjaja, S., Shanka, T., & Marchegiani, C. (2012). states. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Infor-
Credibility of online reviews and initial trust: The roles mation Systems, 16(1), 7.
of reviewer’s identity and review valence. Journal of Nguyen, T. T. T., & Tong, S. (2022). The impact of user-
Vacation Marketing, 18(3), 185–195. generated content on intention to select a travel destina-
Lam, J. M. S., Ismail, H., & Lee, S. (2020). From desktop tion. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 11(3), 443–457.
to destination: User-generated content platforms, co-cre- Olorunsola, V. O., Saydam, M. B., Lasisi, T. T., & Ozturen,
ated online experiences, destination image and satisfac- A. (2023). Exploring tourists’ experiences when visit-
tion. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, ing Petra archaeological heritage site: voices from Trip­
18, 100490. Advisor. Consumer Behavior in Tourism and Hospitality,
Lee, J., & Kim, Y. K. (2020). Online reviews of restaurants: 18(1), 81–96
Expectations-confirmation theory. Journal of Quality Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step-by-
Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 21(5), 582–599. step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows.
Lee, M., & Youn, S. (2009). Electronic word of mouth Routledge.
(eWOM). International Journal of Advertising: The Park, T. (2020). How information acceptance model predicts
Review of Marketing Communications, 28(3), 473–499. customer loyalty? A study from perspective of eWOM
Leung, D. (2021). Unravelling the interplay of review depth, information. The Bottom Line, 33(1), 60–73.
review breadth, and review language style on review Pavlou, P. A., & Dimoka, A. (2006). The nature and role of
usefulness and review adoption. International Journal of feedback text comments in online marketplaces: Impli-
Hospitality Management, 97, 102989. cations for trust building, price premiums and seller
Li, S., Nahar, K., & Fung, B. C. (2015). Product custom- differentiation. Information Systems Research, 17(4),
ization of tablet computers based on the information of 392–414.
online reviews by customers. Journal of Intelligent Man- Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff,
ufacturing, 26, 97–110. N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral
Liang, S., Schuckert, M., & Law, R. (2019). How to improve research: A critical review of the literature and recom-
the stated helpfulness of hotel reviews? A multilevel mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5),
approach. International Journal of Contemporary Hos- 879–903.
pitality Management, 31(2), 953–977. Popy, N. N., & Bappy, T. A. (2022). Attitude toward social
Liu, H., Guo, P., & Yin, H. (2022). Consistent comments and media reviews and restaurant visit intention: A Bangla-
vivid comments in hotels’ online information adoption: deshi perspective. South Asian Journal of Business Stud-
Which matters more? International Journal of Hospital- ies, 11(1), 20–44.
ity Management, 107, 103329. Qiu, L., Pang, J., & Lim, K. H. (2012). Effects of conflict-
Liu, H., Wu, L., & Li, X. (2019). Social media envy: How ing aggregated rating on eWOM review credibility and
experience sharing on social networking sites drives mil- diagnosticity: The moderating role of review valence.
lennials’ aspirational tourism consumption. Journal of Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 631–643.
Travel Research, 58(3), 355–369. Rahaman, M. A., Hassan, H. K., Asheq, A. A., & Islam, K.
Longwell, L. (2021). What’s wrong with TripAdvisor A. (2022). The interplay between eWOM information
Reviews, and what to do about it. TRAVEL ADDICTS. and purchase intention on social media: Through the lens
[Link] of IAM and TAM theory. PloS One, 17(9), 1–19.
López, C., & Farzan, R. (2014). Analysis of local online Reddy, P. R., Pandey, M. K., & Gulati, S. (2022). A study
review systems as digital word-of-mouth. In Proceed- on effect of eWOM information on purchase intention
ings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide for electric vehicles. International Journal of Health
Web (pp. 457–462). Sciences, 6(S8), 3056–3068.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
 32 ISLAM ET AL.

Rietsche, R., Frei, D., Stoeckli, E., & Sollner, M. (2019). Consumer Behavior in Tourism and Hospitality, 17(4),
Not all reviews are equal—A literature review on online 576–590.
review helpfulness. In Proceedings of the 27th European Stone, L. S., & Nyaupane, G. P. (2019). The tourist gaze:
Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Stockholm Domestic versus international tourists. Journal of Travel
& Uppsala, Sweden (pp. 1–18). Research, 58(5), 877–891.
Ruel, E., Wagner, W. E., & Gillespie, B. J. (2016). The prac- Sussman, S. W., & Siegal, W. S. (2003). Informational influ-
tice of survey research: Theory and applications. SAGE ence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge
Publications. [Link] adoption. Information Systems Research 14(1), 47–65.
Ruiz-Mafe, C., Chatzipanagiotou, K., & Curras-Perez, R. Tapanainen, T., Dao, T. K., & Nguyen, T. T. H. (2021).
(2018). The role of emotions and conflicting online Impacts of online word-of-mouth and personalities on
reviews on consumers’ purchase intentions. Journal of intention to choose a destination. Computers in Human
Business Research, 89, 336–344. Behavior, 116, 106656.
Sekaran, U. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill- Teresi, J. A., Yu, X., Stewart, A. L., & Hays, R. D. (2022).
building approach (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. Guidelines for designing and evaluating feasibility pilot
Sharma, H., & Aggrawal, A. G. (2020). What factor deter- studies. Medical Care, 60(1), 95–103.
mine reviewer credibility? An econometric approach Torres, E., Adler, H., & Behnke, C. (2014). Stars, diamonds,
validated through predictive modeling. Kybernetes, and other shiny things: The use of expert and consumer
49(10), 2547–2567. feedback in the hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality and
Shi, H., Cai, S., & Luo, X. R. (2023). Online free product Tourism Management, 21, 34–43.
sampling: The reciprocity and diagnosticity effects. Jour- Vu, D. H., Nguyen, A. T. N., Nguyen, N. T. P., & Tran, D.
nal of Electronic Commerce Research, 24(3), 194–214. B. (2022). Impacts and restoration strategy of the tour-
Shin, E., Chung, T., & Damhort, M. L. (2021). Are negative ism industry post-COVID 19 pandemics: Evidence from
and positive reviews regarding apparel fit influential? Vietnam. Journal of Tourism Futures. Advance online
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An publication. [Link]
International Journal, 25(1), 63–79. Wang, F., Du, Z., & Wang, S. (2023). Information multi-
Shin, S., Du, Q., Ma, Y., Fan, W., & Xiang, Z. (2021). Mod- dimensionality in online customer reviews. Journal of
erating effects of rating on text and helpfulness in online Business Research, 159, 113727.
hotel reviews: An analytical approach. Journal of Hospi- Wang, P., Li, H., & Liu, Y. (2020). Disentangling the factor
tality Marketing & Management, 30(2), 159–177. driving electronic word-of-mouth use through a configu-
Shin, S. Y., Van Der Heide, B., Beyea, D., Dai, Y. N., & rational approach. Internet Research, 30(3), 925–943.
Prchal, B. (2017). Investigating moderating roles of goals, Yadav, N., Verma, S., & Chikhalkar, R. (2024). Online reviews
reviewer similarity, and self-disclosure on the effect of towards reducing risk. Journal of Tourism Futures, 10(2),
argument quality of online consumer reviews on attitude 299–316. [Link]
formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 218–226. Zaman, M. A. (2023). Arrival of foreign tourists far below
Sirithanaphonchai, J. (2017). Identifying consumers’ infor- potential. The Daily Star. [Link]
mation adoption criteria on various online consumer business/economy/news/arrival-foreign-tourists-far-
review platforms: A case of Thai hospitality factor [Doc- below-potential-3428816
toral dissertation]. Brunel University London. Zhang, X., Zhang, X., Liang, S., Yang, Y., & Law, R.
Srivastava, S., Madan, P., Dey, B., Qadir, A., & Mathew, (2023). Infusing new insights: How do review novelty
J. (2022). Impact of destination brand experience on and inconsistency shape the usefulness of online travel
destination advocacy: Trust and loyalty as moderators. reviews? Tourism Management, 96, 104703.

Delivered by Ingenta
IP: [Link] On: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:48:59
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.

View publication stats